Saturday, January 26, 2013

Defending The Big Bang Theory

A good friend of mine recently asked me to read THIS Tumblr post, in
which the writer intelligently and eloquently articulates why he/she can’t
bring themselves to like The Big Bang
Theory. There are a lot of good points made in the post but I can’t quite
say I agree with them, and so I’d like to take this opportunity to defend one
of my favourite TV shows. But before I do, I’d highly recommending reading the
whole post for yourself, as I’ve had to cut a few bits out (partly because I’d
end up repeating myself but mainly because I’ve only seen one episode of Community!).

The cast of The Big Bang Theory.

“And here’s
my issue, here’s why The Big Bang Theory makes me feel uncomfortable. We aren’t
laughing with Leonard, Sheldon, Raj and Howard. We’re laughing at them. Chuck
Lorre has given us four exceptionally intelligent, nerdy main characters and
he’s positioned us as an audience against them. When I watch Big Bang it
becomes more and more obvious that I’m not supposed to relate to the guys (or
more recently Amy Farrah-Fowler). I’m expected to relate to Penny. You only
need to pay attention to the audience laughter to realise that TBBT relies on
positioning us as an outsider to the nerds, as someone like Penny who doesn’t
understand their references, their science, their vocabulary even, and who
doesn’t care to learn.”

I would actually argue that we laugh with Sheldon, Leonard, Howard and
Raj more than we laugh at them. But because the paragraph’s argument is centred
around the supposition that we laugh at them, let’s work with that.

Laughing at comedic characters is not something that is exclusive to The Big Bang Theory, nor is it
necessarily a bad thing. When you strip comedy down to its most raw and simple
form, a lot of it derives from laughing at people. In Only Fools and Horses we’re supposed to laugh at Trigger; in Gavin and Stacey we’re supposed to laugh
at Uncle Bryn; in Fawlty Towers we’re
supposed to laugh at Manuel and, to an extent, Basil himself; in The Vicar of Dibley we’re supposed to
laugh at pretty much everyone who isn’t Geraldine or David. The list goes on.
However, just because we laugh at characters it does not mean we actively
dislike them. On the contrary, it’s usually those characters that become the
most beloved and memorable characters in their respective shows. (I walked
into my university kitchen a few months ago wearing a “Bazinga!” t-shirt with
Sheldon’s face on, and the first thing one of my flatmates said to me was, “I LOVE SHELDON!!!”)

I would also argue that not being able to relate to characters isn’t necessarily
a problem. In The Big Bang Theory Penny
serves the exact same purpose as the companions do in Doctor Who. In Doctor Who
the main character is, just like the main characters in The Big Bang Theory, far more intelligent than the audience and
well outside our frame of reference. We’re not supposed to be able to relate to
him. Through the companion we are able to enter his world, just as through
Penny we are able to enter Sheldon, Leonard, Raj and Howard’s world. Therefore rather
than simply being outsiders to their world, we’re outsiders stepping in. And actually, it’s from
that collision of worlds that a lot of the comedy derives. Sheldon finds Penny’s
world just as ridiculous as she finds his. Furthermore, I don’t think it’s
quite accurate to say that Penny doesn’t care to learn about this strange, new
culture. She might not understand Sheldon & co.’s world and she might not
be as excited by its contents as they are, but that doesn’t equate to being
completely unwilling to learn about it. If that were the case, we would never
have had (to cite just one example) an exchange of dialogue like this:

Penny: Do or do not. There is no try.

Leonard: Did you just quote Star Wars?!

Penny: I believe I quoted Empire Strikes Back!

- 3.19, The Wheaton Recurrence

You can't say Penny doesn't try!

“The Big
Bang Theory rarely constructs jokes. Often it relies on pop culture references
as humour. I recently listened to a podcast from The Film Talk where – when
reviewing the film Ted – they spoke about the psychology behind reference as
joke. We laugh when we hear a pop culture reference out of nostalgia, we
remember enjoying it so we laugh at the referenced rather than the reference.
Laughing at a pop culture reference also shows that we understand it. It
creates a sense of inclusion, we don’t want other people to think we didn’t get
the reference so we laugh to show that we too understand, we too know our
culture. And don’t get me wrong, I love a good pop culture reference, my
all-time favourite show is Buffy The Vampire Slayer and that’s full of them.
However, a reference for a reference’s sake does not count as a joke. It’s lazy
humour and it’s surprising to see just how often Big Bang utilises this.”

I have to admit, this isn’t a theory that I was aware of, though I think
it’s a very interesting idea. I’m inclined to disagree with it somewhat, but
that’s not to say it’s universally untrue since humour works differently for
different people. Personally, I’d say that even though I enjoy understanding the various pop culture references the show
makes, I don’t laugh at them unless I find them genuinely funny. For example, I
didn’t laugh when, in The Jiminy
Conjecture, Leonard and Sheldon debated the origins of Wolverine’s bone
claws, yet I killed myself laughing in The
Big Bran Hypothesis when the guys animatedly discussed the scientific validity
of Superman saving Lois Lane from falling to her death. I can see how The Film Talk’s theory might hold water
during the actual taping of the show (which is done in front of a live
audience); however, I don’t think it explains why viewers who watch the show
from their living rooms laugh. They, especially if they’re watching by themselves,
have no other people to ‘convince’, and therefore I’m inclined to believe that
when they laugh, they’re laughing because they find it genuinely funny. Lazy
humour is, I think, perhaps the wrong term for it. It’s more the verbal
equivalent of slapstick; simple, effective, but still valid. – As I said,
though, humour changes from person to person and I’m no psychology expert, so
feel free to disagree!

Sheldon discusses Superman.

“But this
specifically is not my main problem, lazy humour is one thing but cruel humour
is quite another. If you watch, really watch an episode of The Big Bang Theory
and pay attention to when the audience laughs it soon becomes clear that what
they’re laughing at. What Chuck Lorre wants us to find funny is not the jokes which
the characters are making, it’s the characters themselves. At one point Howard
mentions playing Dungeons and Dragons. There is no joke attached to this, it’s
not the punchline to any set up, however it is treated as one. Howard says the
words “Dungeons and Dragons” and the audience laughs. They’re not laughing at a
joke, they’re laughing at the fact that Howard plays D&D. And this kind of
thing happens all the time throughout the show. How many times has a joke been
made out of Leonard owning action figures or Sheldon collecting comics? When,
in season one, Penny invites the guys to her Halloween party and they are
excited about making costumes, we’re supposed to laugh at them, to think they
are silly for dressing as a Hobbit or Thor when everyone else is trying to look
sexy. The reason I feel uncomfortable watching The Big Bang Theory is because
it’s laughing at me, at people like me.”

Here, I’d like to make reference to my earlier point about laughing at characters being perfectly normal in comedies. The characters in The Big Bang Theory are designed to be funny – just as the characters in shows such as Friends and The Simpsons are designed to be funny. And actually, a lot of the time the jokes are just as funny as the characters themselves. It’s hard for me to respond to the Dungeons and Dragons point because I don’t know which episode that scene is from – but I do disagree that we’re really laughing at them because of what they do. It’s more the enthusiasm they have for what they do that we find funny, but that’s a universal kind of humour that would work in the case of any type of character. Let me explain. At the beginning of The Weekend Vortex there’s no laughter when Raj suggests spending the weekend playing the new Star Wars video game; in The Vegas Renormalization we don’t laugh at the guys playing Star Wars Guess Who?; and in The Cushion Saturation we don’t laugh at them playing inter-departmental paintball. As I said, it’s not them or what they do that we laugh at in the show - it’s their enthusiasm. I think we would find it just as funny if, say, a typical jock-like character were equally as excited at the prospect of dressing up as a football player. We laugh at their enthusiasm not because we’re ridiculing it but because we recognise it. It’s the same kind of enthusiasm that we see in Apple fans who queue up for days just to be first to get their hands on the latest product. It’s the same kind of enthusiasm we see in Call of Duty fans whenever a new game in the series is released. It’s the same kind of enthusiasm we see in football fans when their team have made the cup final. Everybody is incredibly enthusiastic about something, and we love seeing the characters in The Big Bang Theory so unashamedly enthusiastic about what they love because it taps into the fanboy/fangirl part of all of us.

The Big Bang Theory: exposing the inner fangirl/fanboy in all of us.

“This
disdain for the main characters taints the show for me. It seems mean, bullying
and like I said before, just lazy. I feel like Chuck Lorre is collectively
breaking our glasses and stealing our lunch money. You see, this kind of humour
only works if in fact you do relate to Penny. If you relate to Leonard, or god
forbid Sheldon, you don’t feel entertained, you just feel belittled. The way
that even the three guys laugh at Sheldon seems especially cruel. Yes, he’s
painted as annoying, as an inconvenience and as just plain rude, however he is
also read by many as autistic. So much so that my friend who works at a school
for autistic children believed he had Asperger’s Syndrome and once asked me how
they got away with ridiculing a character with special needs. I explained to
her that no, Sheldon is not canonically autistic and she was shocked. She told
me that he was a totally accurate portrayal of someone on the autistic spectrum
and had many characteristics of someone with Asperger’s – specifically the
inability to recognise sarcasm or understand human emotion as well as the
obsession with “his spot” and his distress when routine is changed. Sheldon is
consistently positioned as someone to be laughed at. It’s made to seem ok by
the fact that his friends are laughing at him too and, of course, he isn’t
technically autistic he’s just almost indistinguishable from someone who is.”

I’m actually aware that a lot of people believe Sheldon to be autistic,
and whilst this isn’t an idea that crossed my mind when I first started
watching the show, I can understand why people think this. It’s a very
difficult topic, I’ll admit, and I’m still not 100% sure what I think. But I think
it’s the fact that, in my view, The Big
Bang Theory hasn’t crossed the line between cruel mockery and comedy that
keeps it funny. At the end of the day, Sheldon was not written as an autistic
character. Pedantry is a trait associated with but not exclusive to autism. The
kind of pedantry Sheldon displays stems from his arrogance, which in turn stems
from his genius, and this is why it is funny. It’s because we know that,
ultimately, although Sheldon may be the butt of many jokes he is also the
instigator of many jokes (hence “Bazinga!”) and is still the cleverest person in
whatever room he stands in. He isn’t quite as vulnerable as autistic people are
which is why it is ‘safe’ to laugh at/with him. If autism had deliberately been the basis of his character then yes, it would be wrong to laugh in the way that
we do. But it wasn’t, and it would be wrong, I think, to think less of Sheldon’s
funniness as a character simply because he – accidentally – possesses a trait
linked (but, to reiterate, not exclusive) to autism.

Dr. Sheldon Cooper.

“I relate far more to Leonard, Raj, Howard and yes,
even Sheldon than I do to Penny. When the studio audience laughs at the mention
of Battlestar Galactica, at the fact that Leonard has a bat signal, at the idea
that someone would wait in line to see a new cut of Indiana Jones, they are
laughing at me too. They are saying they’re better than me, that I’m silly for
liking those things and that makes me a target for ridicule. When I talk about
alphabetising my DVD collection, or when I mention the fact that I watch
certain TV box sets on certain days according to a schedule my older brother
calls me Sheldon. He thinks that because I like organisation, because I, like
Sheldon, am a nerd, he is superior to me. I am proud of the things that I like.
I am proud of knowing a lot about those things. I am proud of being
enthusiastic about the things I love and The Big Bang Theory wants to tell me
not to be. It wants me to be like Penny, intellectually inferior but far more
socially acceptable.

And all this wouldn’t really matter if not for the
fact that The Big Bang Theory targets nerds as part of its fan base. We’re used
to being ridiculed on TV but it’s usually by shows which aren’t aimed at us.
The Big Bang Theory goes to Comic-Con, it sells its merchandise at Forbidden
Planet. The fact that it sells merchandise at all says that wants part of a
cult nerd following. The Big Bang Theory is the worst kind of bully – the one
that pretends to be your friend and then takes the piss out of you behind your
back. It will take your viewership, it will take your money and it will laugh
in your face as it systematically puts you down.”s

For what it’s worth, in terms of interests I probably relate a lot more to Leonard, Raj, Howard and
Sheldon than I do Penny, and I’ve not once felt belittled. I genuinely believe
that, at its core, The Big Bang Theory is
a show that celebrates people like them rather than one which
ridicules them.

A celebration of nerds.

“And this isn’t even touching on the way TBBT
portrays women. Most notably the fact that until recently the only female
character on the show had no understanding of science or nerd culture, and the
episode in which it’s treated as a miracle that a woman is in a comic book
store – “she must be lost” they say. Even Amy Farrah Fowler isn’t the geek girl
representative we may have hoped for. She’s portrayed as distinctly asexual and
when she mentions sex it’s always played for laughs, because of course
intelligent, socially awkward women shouldn’t think about sex at all. Another
troubling thing about Big Bang is its insidious homophobia. We are supposed to
laugh whenever Howard and Raj do something which could be considered as
homosexual. The closeness of their friendship is the target of jokes as is
their fear and disgust at being mistaken for a gay couple. Again Amy Farrah
Fowler’s frequent references to lesbian experimentation are treated as absurd.
We are supposed to laugh at her possible attraction to Penny and at Penny’s
discomfort when she alludes to this. Considering Jim Parsons (who plays
Sheldon) is himself gay, as is Sara Gilbert (who plays the recurring character
Leslie Winkle), you would think – or at least hope for a more accepting
attitude towards homosexuality. Similarly, with guest stars such as Wil
Wheaton, a champion of nerd culture, you’d think they’d refrain from ridiculing
nerds the way they do.”

On the whole, I don’t think I have a huge problem with the way in which
women are portrayed in the show. Penny is undoubtedly the main female
character, but the character of Bernadette (whose intelligence can’t be disputed)
has, I believe, been around since the early episodes of the third season.
Before her, Leslie Winkle, admittedly only a minor character, was frequently
shown to be more than a match for Sheldon. In the case of Amy, we don’t laugh
at her when she talks about sex because she’s an intelligent woman talking
about sex, or because her sexuality is somewhat ambiguous, we laugh because she
often talks about it in a fundamentally inappropriate way, and it comes as such
a shock to our systems that in many ways the only thing we can do is laugh.

What I do have a problem with,
though, are the constant race jokes that Raj (and other characters) makes about
himself. Episode after episode there are allusions to the colour of his skin;
there is persistent disparagement of Indian culture, and there is a sort of
relentless reminder that he is foreign. Culture jokes are fine when they’re
done lovingly and done well (see Bend It
Like Beckham if you want a perfect example of this), but when The Big Bang Theory tries its hand at
them they are tasteless and uncomfortable to watch, and that is the only gripe
I have with the show.

Raj: poorly handled in the show.

“To bring this to a close I think I found my
answers:

Why don’t I like The Big Bang Theory anymore? I think at first I was so happy
to see people like me represented on mainstream television that I ignored the
cruelty behind the humour. As I continue to watch the programme and see more
and more repeats on E4 in the daytime it’s become much clearer that actually
I’m not being represented. I’m being ridiculed.

Why do I feel uncomfortable watching it? Because whenever I laugh at a joke,
and I do sometimes find it funny, I feel like I’m laughing at my friends, like
I’m putting myself and the people I identify with down. And that’s not a nice
feeling, that’s not how I want to feel when I watch a comedy.

Why do I get so annoyed when I see people singing its praises online? Because
it reminds me that however many times people say that geek is cool, that nerd
is en vogue, there will always be people laughing at me and making money from
me at the same time.

I’m sorry for the huge post. I just really wanted
to get my view of things out there and hear what people think, whether people
agree or think I’ve taken it in completely the wrong way.”

Ultimately, I’m
really grateful to have had the chance to respond to such a well-written
argument. I don’t agree with much of what it says but it’s good to look at both
sides of the coin and it’s really made me think about why I do like The Big Bang Theory.

I think
it’s a shame that there are a lot of self-professed nerds out there who don’t
like the show. I’m quite the geek myself, and I genuinely believe that the show
is a celebration of geekiness and nerdiness. It’s a show made for people like
us which the rest of the world just happens to have fallen in love with.